Condominium Corporation directors and officers owe a duty to disclose material information to unit owners. However, the responses I received from the Association’s new general counsel refused to answer each of the 17 questions I submitted to the board on March 30, 2019, because I was unable to observe the majority of the Association’s March 27, 2019, board of directors meeting. Thirteen of the 17 answers I received stated: “The board has taken the matter under advisement.” The other 4 answers I received were largely non-responsive.
My questions were as follows:
- Why isn’t the property manager’s supervisor attending board meetings?
- Why didn’t the board approve the January 8, 2019, board meeting minutes?
- Why are unit owners offered the opportunity to purchase a/c sleeves at a discount if this item is a reserve study component?
- How much are the insurance deductibles for the latest lawsuit filed against the Association?
- Didn’t the audit engagement letter make it clear that the 2018 audit must be completed well before the April 1, 2019, deadline?
- If the Association switched to an accrual method of accounting, how can there be bills outstanding and not yet recorded?
- Why isn’t the Association’s investment advisor, Baird, not making (free) investment recommendations as it used to?
- What are director Jim Belton’s (whom was assigned to make investment decisions for the board) qualifications with respect to dispensing investment advice?
- Has the board ever adopted an investment policy statement for the Association’s Replacement Reserve Fund?
- Has the board ever adopted a policy for interfund loans (including terms for interest rate, payment dates and/or duration)?
- What does “Unit owners would be provided a draft copy for review at the __________________” in the latest approved board meeting minutes mean?
- Why is the Association’s new general counsel being retained at a higher rate than budgeted?
- Who authorized the hiring of the last employee as a maintenance helper even though this position was not budgeted?
- Did unit 1103 receive the 22.1 disclosure letter prior to being sold on contingency?
- Please cite statutory authority that allows 2 board members to make decisions in lieu of the full 5-member board of directors?
- Please cite statutory authority that allows the board of directors to increase fees without giving unit owners advance notice?
- Please confirm that no board decisions were made after the board reconvened after the February 2019 executive session.
State Parkway’s new general counsel, Nicholas Bartzen of Altus Legal LLC, gave me the “The board has taken the matter under advisement” response to questions number 1, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13 and 14. The purported response to question number 2 was “Please refer to eSTAR for all approved meeting minutes.” The dubious response to question number 15 was “The board authorizes all decisions in compliance with the Association’s governing documents and the [Illinois Condominium Property Act]. The response I received to question number 16 was “All necessary notice for rule changes will be provided pursuant to the [Illinois Condominium Property Act]. And the final question was answered with the same response to question number 15.
The irony here is the association’s current board ran on the “Time for Transparency” platform, but are obviously struggling with the concept of full and complete disclosure, not to mention fiduciary duty of candor.